"The Chief Minister and Minister for Home Affairs have emerged from this saga with no disciplinary case, no Chief Officer, a pending report from a QC likely to be critical of the Island’s Government, and a bill for over a million pounds. They are not well placed to criticise the actions of others" Deputy Bob Hill.............................................
Trevor Pitmans Blog.......................................BALDTRUTH"

Saturday, October 29, 2011

The Failure of this present Council of Ministers & the Jersey State Media to do anything that might be in favor of the people who suffered terribly in the Care of the States Of Jersey

March the 1st 2011 the date the Committee of Enquiry was passed through the Sates of Jersey - 7 months on and where are we? I will tell you exactly where we are. We are now heading into the farcical position that the person who is now favorite to be our next Chief Minister is none over than ex Bailiff, Chief Judge Sir Philip Bailhache.

This man, I would imagine, would be the most conflicted person in the chamber when the subject of Child Abuse comes up let alone have anything to do with the committee of enquiry. Let's remind ourselfs what he said on May 9th 2008. And just also remember how he wasn't being very honest about his intentions to run as Chief Minister during the election.

How ironic that he lambasts the press in his speech below but was more than happy to have the JEP run his election campaign. A paper that has truly denigrated the Abuse Survivors more than most. The fact that these two bastions of power sleep in the same bed should come as no surprise to the real caring people of Jersey. Remember my email exchange on VFP with an Abuse Survivor, myself and Chris Bright editor of the JEP; Read it here it's disgusting.

Ever wondered why the JEP was so rabid in it's trashing of Graham Power, Lenny Harper & the Abuse Investigation? The answer is simple.Their allegiance runs with the old Jersey Feudal Power it always has. Why do you think over this past year the JEP have been turning the screw on Senator Cohen and Senator Ozouf the reason is simple they are dictating opinion management. They have done the same with Stuart Syvret with their laughable reports on his court case as this blog posting belo shows

I am sure that many of those who were here in May 1945 will remember the old saying that one of the first casualties of war is the truth. This year we have learnt that even in peacetime, once a media bandwagon starts rolling, it is difficult to distinguish what is true from what is fictitious.

Liberation Day is as good a time as any to take stock and to shake ourselves free of the misinformation to which the child abuse inquiry has given rise. It is extraordinary how quickly it all happened. It all started with the discovery of a fragment of a child's skull and a sniffer dog who showed interest in six different sites. Within days newspapers and broadcasters had converted that information into stories of finding six or more bodies of children, and within two weeks those stories had crossed the world feeding a frenzy of righteous indignation and further wild speculation. A cover-up by government was suggested, and there was incredulity that local people had not noticed these sinister events.

Unjustified smears about wholesale collaboration during the occupation led to suggestions that the Island was full of dark secrets and that ours was a community that cared nothing for vulnerable children.

Now we know that the fragment of skull is at least 60 years old and possibly very much older than that. There are as yet no bodies, no evidence of any murder, and no evidence of cover-ups by government.

Hardly any of this has been beamed across the world. Yet many journalists continue to write about the Island's so called child abuse scandal. All child abuse, wherever it happens, is scandalous, but it is the unjustified and remorseless denigration of Jersey and her people that is the real scandal. The truth is that we do not yet know what happened at Haut de la Garenne or in other places. What we do know is that a rigorous investigation is taking place and, in due course, a balanced judgement will be possible. A brave writer in the Guardian earlier this week was the first journalist in a national newspaper, so far as I know, to confront this truth

Then we come to the BDO hearing that happened on friday. Im glad the evidence has now been heard. Out of all the work that we have put in concerning the exposing of the "Jersey Child Abuse Cover Up" nothing gives me more pleasure than the BDO review. This, for me, really demonstrated what investigative work is all about. What started as a small seed has developed into a fully grown forest (I was going to take that bit out but thought fcuk it)

The BDO Review is going to one of the most definitive works on the Financial Aspect of Operation Rectangle and associated issues. This will include the absolute ludicrous reporting of the Jersey State Media. Historians will use this review as a source of hard evidenced fact in future research. The reason for this is again very simple. The people the review has interviewed has been very wide ranging and their evidence in places has been simply staggering.

I await this report

I feel fully Vindicated as a concerned member of the public in bringing my evidence and concerns to the Home Affairs Scrutiny Sub Panel.

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

I will be focusing on the BDO Review as it enters into it's final phase before release. This is a very important review as it has been a very long process with certain key individuals giving evidence.

Everyone has been able to have their say, except for former D/Superintendent Mick Gradwell who simply refused, or in my own very humble opinion, simply ran away.

What has been brought up during this review is the one sided reporting of the Jersey State Controlled Media. This has also been highlighted during this election when the JEP ran Sir Philips election campaign.

This will blogged on over the coming weeks and months

Funny how the JEP, the only Jersey Paper, backed the man who gave us that horrendous liberation day speech in 2008.

The findings of this report could have a huge significance for the forthcoming Committee of Enquiry & for all the Jersey Abuse Victims. Here is one simple reason why.

In August 2008 D/Superintendant Mick Gradwell took over as the SIO of the Jersey Historic Abuse Enquiry. This man was leaking information to Daily Mail Journalist David Rose - During a Live Enquiry. This is not hearsay but FACT. We all know the History surrounding David Rose. Mick Gradwell refused to give evidence. As Doctor Watson would say "No Sh*t Sherlock".

Will Gradwell come back and explain this to a Committee of Enquiry?

There are many other serious points that have come up during the hearings

Mr. Graham Power has agreed to give further evidence to the Scrutiny Sub Panel on Friday

morning. This will take place via a conference call in the Blampied room commencing at 11am.

The Sub Panel contacted Mr. Power and asked him if he would be willing to provide a copy of his statement to Wiltshire as it was believed that it contained information relevant to a full understanding of the overall background and context in which financial decisions were taken. Mr. Power agreed to this request on the basis that evidence supplied to Scrutiny is privileged under article 8 of the States of Jersey (Powers, Privileges and Immunities) Scrutiny Panels, PAC and Privileges and Procedures Committee) (Jersey) Regulations 2006.

The Sub Panel has received the document on a confidential basis and will not publish the unredacted statement as evidence as it contains names of individuals and information which is not relevant to the Scrutiny enquiry. However, members will be able to refer to the statement in their questions to Mr. Power.

The Sub Panel intends to finalise its report and to present its report to the States in the second week of November, before the end of the current States Assembly.

Ends

Notes to editors:

The following terms of reference have been agreed for this review

• To examine the instructions under which BDO Alto was engaged to review the financial management of Operation Rectangle and their methods for gathering evidence for this review;

• To clarify the connection between the BDO Alto review and the review on the same matter separately commissioned by the Acting Chief Officer of Police;

• To identify the reasons why the Senior Investigating Officer for Operation Rectangle was not interviewed by BDO Alto and was not given the opportunity to respond to the report’s findings;

• To clarify the liaison between BDO Alto and the Wiltshire Police, in particular the eferences in the BDO Alto report to the Senior Investigating Officer’s statements to Wiltshire Police;

• To investigate how details of the review into the financial management of Operation Rectangle came to be published in a national newspaper in October 2009; and

Sunday, October 23, 2011

Mr Hill lost his his seat as Deputy of St Martin during wednesday election

Bob has served the parish of St Martin for 18 years. He has fought hard for the parishioners and parish on many different issues not least the long drawn out saga of the roads ownership of Maufant Village. His attendance at parish meetings and states sittings have been second to none. In the past 3 years Deputy Hill has brought 29 propositions and over 100 oral and written questions to the states. Mr Luce, who defeated Bob at this election, has a very tough act to follow. I wish Mr Luce all the best in serving the parish of St Martin and the people of Jersey.

I have heard all sorts as to why Deputy Hill lost this election.

Deputy Hill fought the corner of former suspended Chief of Police Graham Power & the victims of horrific Abuse in the care of the States of Jersey. I have heard that people were getting sick of the amount of time Bob spent asking questions concerning the Napier Review into the suspension of Graham Power. What people don't realise, or just wish to gloss over, is that one of the reasons so many questions had to be lodged was simply because our Chief Minister was openly misleading the house. Yes, Chief Minister Le Suer spent about 8 months openly misleading the house. I will call it straightforward bullsh*ting.

I could go on for ever on this issue. I will await the findings of the BDO Review before coming back to this subject and other related matters

Deputy Hill conducted himself with complete integrity

He Leaves the States with his head held High. A man who never backed away from asking the difficult questions. If we just wont nodding dogs then so be it. The States under the Ozouf/Le Suer leadership has been disastrous make no mistake .

When I started this post I had so much I wanted to say but I will leave it by saying that i'm gutted that Bob lost his seat and wish him all the very best in his retirement.

Never ever let Truth, Honesty & Integrity become an issues as to wether one gets elected or not.

If you do, then you are no good to me or the people of Jersey

Thanks again Deputy Hill

Rico Sorda

Team Voice

Here we have Deputy Hill making Gradwell & Warcup look like a bunch of lying idiots. Also Some other interviews that Deputy Hill gave the voice;

Sunday, October 2, 2011

In february 2008 JAR/6 came out of the ground & the rest they say is History

Was it a part of a child's skull?did it contain collagen?was it part of a coconut?

I hate Jar/6.

The reason I hate Jar/6 so much is that this piece of whatever has been used by so many people including politicians & the media to trash the Child Abuse Investigation. How much Child Abuse can you hide behind this small piece of evidence?

From David Rose through to Wiltshire we have had coconut

But guess what Something is not right

Like I said before here we go again

I must thank Senatorial Candidate Dr Mark Forskitt for obtaining the information published below. It has been obtained under the UK's Freedom of Information "FOI" and has raised so many issues not least the 1 million pounds Wiltshire investigation that came to nothing as they missed all their deadlines and the Home Affairs Minister didn't know what planet he was on.

So lets start

In february 2009 Kew gardens received something reporting to be Jar/6 from West Yorkshire Police - WHY?

Lenny Harper had left the force in August 2008 & Graham Power was suspended in November 2008

Everyone was saying it was coconut,-the evidence spoke for itself- even Wiltshire were saying that in 2008 Lenny Harper new it was coconut. So why and who sent something to West Yorkshire Police and what connection does West Yorkshire police have in this. We, at the voice, have published loads of information on Jar/6 with no one being able to confirm what it was.

Why weren't the other bones and teeth tested in February 2009?

Something is quite not right here

Here are some of Wiltshire's conclusions;

Conclusion 18a

2.142 CO POWER neglected his duty to provide strategic oversight of States of Jersey Police media policy following receipt of confirmation that Exhibit JAR/6 was not human bone, as previously portrayed by the States of Jersey Police within its media releases.

Conclusion 18b

2.143. CO POWER neglected his duty to correct the content of misleading press releases made by States of Jersey Police following receipt of forensic

opinion about the nature of Exhibit JAR/6.

Conclusion 18c

2.144 CO POWER neglected his duty to supervise DCO HARPER in relation to his media releases following receipt of forensic opinion about the nature of

Exhibit JAR/6.

2.145 A letter from Dr X at the Oxford laboratory was sent on

1 May 2008 addressed to DCO HARPER confirming the work carried out on

Exhibit JAR/6 and the conclusion that it was not bone but almost certainly wood.

2.146 On 5 May 2008, Senator James PERCHARD raised with CO POWER the matter of there being a rumour in existence that stated the skull was not human and that maybe, when the time is right, it would be advisable to put the record straight ‘publicly’ on this. The response from CO POWER was ‘I think that it will be

possible to do this as part of a general release relating to the scientific results of

more recent finds when these are available’. Whilst this approach sounds

reasonable, this Inquiry can find no evidence that the States of Jersey Police ever

did make such a ‘general release’ prior to the press conference on 12 November 2008.

2.147 DCO HARPER would have it that he did not receive Dr X letter of

1 May 2008, but this Inquiry has established that

Dr X e-mailed DCO HARPER a copy of the letter on 17 May 2008. If there had been any room for doubt beforehand, there could now be no doubt that from that time DCO HARPER knew Exhibit JAR/6 was not bone.

2.148 Even so, on 18 May 2008, DCO HARPER formulated a press release for circulation which summarised the findings of the examination of Exhibit JAR/6 by he laboratory. He is equivocal in his reference to Exhibit JAR/6 implying that the

laboratory had not definitively stated it was not bone and instead focussed on their

comment that if there was a need to show definitively what it was it would require

further examination.

2.149 DCO HARPER recounts in the same press release, details of recent finds – 20 pieces of bone and six children’s teeth – which were all found in what he was calling the ‘cellar’ area. He spoke of expecting the results of forensic tests to date them in the next week stating ‘at that stage we will know more about the possibility that there might have been unexplained deaths of children within Haut de la Garenne’. In this way, he had effectively glossed over the issue of Exhibit JAR/6 and encouraged the very worst impressions in the minds of the public and

particularly the media

2.150 Nevertheless, Senator James PERCHARD persisted in his attempts to have the status of Exhibit JAR/6 made subject of a public statement in the Senate.

CO POWER merely advised the Home Affairs Minister Wendy KINNARD to

comment that many items had been sent for examination, but by the time she

came back to him and pointed out that she would be asked exactly when

DCO HARPER knew it was not bone, he had left Jersey for a conference on the

Isle of Man which may account for the lack of a response from him.

2.151 On 20 May 2008, whilst at this conference, CO POWER says that someone told him that the first ‘find’ was a piece of coconut and that this came as a total ‘bolt from the blue’. In light of the sequence of events outlined above, this Inquiry is sceptical that CO POWER had no inkling of this, especially bearing in mind the existence of daily meetings between himself and DCO HARPER. Nevertheless, it appears that by 20 May 2008 – at the latest – CO POWER accepts that he was now fully aware doubts existed about the nature of Exhibit JAR/6.

2.152 CO POWER explains that he had discussions with DCO HARPER and Senator Wendy KINNARD where he sought more information and advised on ‘holding lines’ to take with the media. He states that he asked DCO HARPER directly about the doubts over the first ‘find’ and was told that there had been confusing messages coming from the Laboratory, but that DCO HARPER would ‘take full responsibility’.

2.153 If CO POWER’s recollection is correct, he had grounds to suspect that Exhibit JAR/6 was not human, yet permitted or failed to correct DCO HARPER’s

continuing misleading statements about the scientific evidence being ‘inconclusive’

rather than present the true situation to the public.

2.154 CO POWER’s method of dealing with this was to call for a report from

Home Affairs Minister Wendy KINNARD to seek to close down further discussion

on the matter and not make further comment on the basis she was waiting for a

report on the matter.

2.155 This Inquiry concludes this attempt to ‘close down further discussions’ was unhealthy procrastination. An open and transparent approach would have been to report what was known at that time. CO POWER failed to do so.

2.156 Even as late as 8 June 2008, CO POWER was enquiring of DCO HARPER as to the current position in relation to the fragment and asking ‘are we accepting that it is not human or do we see the results as inconclusive? DCO HARPER replied ‘we see the results now as inconclusive’. This inaccurate view was not challenged by CO POWER, who we have good reason to believe, knew this was not a fair or wholly truthful stance to maintain and who continued in his failure to effectively supervise DCO HARPER on the issue. If CO POWER was in any doubt, should have sought an independent review. He did not do so and the police and politicians were being misled.

This is the Information obtained under the "FOI"

In the next part about this object

mark forskitt1 May 2011

Dear Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew,Please list, with date of examination, each person who made anidentification of the fragment excavated at Haut de la Garene,Jersey during the police investigation there into historic abuse(operation rectangle), and tagged by the police as JAR/6. Pleasealso identify the findings of each person who examined this item ofevidence, and where the item is now located.Yours faithfully,Mark Forskitt

Dear David Ivell,I am surprised still to have no reply to my request re Haut de laGarenne, Jersey, police investigation, as acknowledged by you 6thMay Normally my request should have been answered by 31st May.Please confirm a reply will be made imminently.Yours sincerely,Mark Forskitt

The Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew

Kew

Richmond

Surrey TW9 3AB

Mr Mark Forskitt

Sent by email to:

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx

2 June 2011

Dear Mr Forskitt,

I am writing on behalf of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew ("RBG Kew") in response to your Freedom of Information request dated 1 May 2011.

You asked for the following information:

Please list, with date of examination, each person who made an identification of the fragment excavated at Haut de la Garene, Jersey during the police investigation there into historic abuse (operation rectangle), and tagged by the police as JAR/6. Please also identify the findings of each person who examined this item of evidence, and where the item is now located.

Professor Monique Simmonds, Deputy Keeper and Head of Sustainable Uses of Plants Group at the Jodrell Laboratory, RBG Kew co-ordinated the analysis of sample JAR 6 received from a representative of the West Yorkshire Police.

Professor Simmonds received the sample from the West Yorkshire Police on 11th February 2009. Her initial view, on seeing the sample, was that it might be the outer shell of a coconut. Shortly thereafter, Professor Simmonds arranged for an expert on this group of plants, Dr William Baker, a taxonomist and Head of Palm Research in the Herbarium at RBG Kew, to exam the sample to confirm her initial assessment.

Dr Baker confirmed that the material was from the coconut palm (Cocus nucifera) a member of the Palm family Arecaceae. He identified the sample as a fragment from a coconut endocarp, the layer which surrounds the seed.

Sample JAR 6 was returned to a representative of the West Yorkshire Police on the 31 March 2009.

I hope that you are satisfied with the way in which we have dealt with your request.

However, should you not be satisfied, you are encouraged to contact the person within RBG Kew who is responsible for assessing RBG Kew’s responses to information requests. This person is our Director, Business and Corporate Services, and currently the Acting Director is Monique Simmonds. You can write to her at the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 3AB.

If you remain dissatisfied with the way in which RBG Kew has dealt with your request, you are entitled to ask the Information Commissioner to review our decision. You can contact the Office of the Information Commissioner at the address below.